Barbara Riis-Christensen: Common core leaves significant gaps in math

When programs like Common Core are imposed on the public schools, the class differences related to education make an already bad situation worse.

Under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, all students who receive special-education services are entitled to a “free and appropriate” education. That education must be individualized and designed to meet the child’s unique needs. No set of grade-specific standards can fully reflect the great variety in abilities, needs, learning rates and achievement levels of students in any given classroom.

The standards should allow the widest possible range of students to participate fully from the outset to ensure maximum participation of students with special education needs. When you eliminate entire groups of students, it is class warfare.

James Milgram, Professor Emeritus of Stanford University, was a member of the Common Core Validation committee and the committee’s only “content expert.” He was one of the 25 members of the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association validation committee.

Milgram writes that there are a number of extremely serious failings in Common Core standards. For example, by the end of fifth grade the material being covered in arithmetic and algebra under Common Core is more than a year behind the early grade expectations in most high-achieving countries. By the end of seventh grade, core standards are roughly two years behind.

Milgram says Common Core does not require proficiency with addition and subtraction until fourth grade and does not require proficiency with multiplication using the standard algorithm (a logical step-by-step procedure for solving a mathematical problems) until fifth grade; it does not require proficiency with division using the standard algorithm until sixth grade; Common Core starts teaching decimals in fourth grade but fails to teach key concepts through seventh grade; it fails to teach prime factors. Algebra I is missing components needed for algebra II and calculus; algebra II is missing key topics for calculus and geometry.

Does teaching this way make sense?

Common Core standards are not internationally benchmarked. Here is a third-grade math problem under Common Core: Add 26 plus 17 by breaking apart numbers to make a 10. Use a number that adds with the 6 in 26 to make a 10. Since 6 plus 4 equals 10, use 4. Think: 17 equals 4 plus 13. Now, add 26 plus 4 to get 30. Add 30 plus 13 to get 43. So, 26 plus 17 equals 43.

Old way, stacked vertically:

26

+ 17

43

The schools are receiving $3.5 billion in the revised 2015-16 federal budget for Common Core implementation. There is $3.5 billion in one-time, discretionary funding through the reimbursement of unfunded mandates. That is on top of the $1.25 billion for Common Core instruction in 2014) another $450 million in 2015 already budgeted. This makes $5.2 billion for Common Core in California alone.

Business and government are now the customers for education. If what we’re doing in the classroom is designed to benefit them rather than the child sitting at the desk, can we really call that education?

Sinhue Noriega, in his book “If It’s Broken Don’t Fix It,” writes that the goal of education is student learning. But the real goal is not that lofty; education has become a business.

There are excellent teachers and outstanding principals who go beyond to provide quality opportunities to enhance the educations of their students. You might want to investigate your child’s school, as if your child’s future depends upon it – because it does.

This story was originally published September 22, 2015 at 2:04 PM with the headline "Barbara Riis-Christensen: Common core leaves significant gaps in math."